IL ROUTE 60/83 Community Advisory Group Meeting November 17, 2016 - - PDF document

▶
il route 60 83
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

IL ROUTE 60/83 Community Advisory Group Meeting November 17, 2016 - - PDF document

Feb 02, 2024 452 likes •823 views

IL ROUTE 60/83 Community Advisory Group Meeting November 17, 2016 NOTES 1 Outline Agenda Introduction of Participants Summary of Previous Stakeholder Involvement and Community Advisory Group Meetings Recommended Roadway Geometry

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

NOTES

IL ROUTE 60/83

Community Advisory Group Meeting

November 17, 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

NOTES

Outline Agenda

  • Introduction of Participants
  • Summary of Previous Stakeholder Involvement and

Community Advisory Group Meetings

  • Recommended Roadway Geometry
  • Recommended Railroad Grade Separation Alternate
  • Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
  • Water Quality and Best Management Practices (BMPs)
  • Schedule
slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

NOTES

Who Are We? Introductions

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

NOTES Previous Community Advisory Group Meetings

  • Seven Previous Meetings – Items Discussed

– Stakeholder Involvement Plan – Community Context Audit – Problem Statement – Existing Traffic and Drainage – Applicable Design Criteria – Development of Alternatives – Complete Streets Policy – Grade Separation Options

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

NOTES

Project Location

  • Central Lake

County

  • Villages of

Mundelein and Long Grove

  • Townships

– Freemont – Libertyville – Vernon – Ela

  • Between

IL Route 176 (Maple Ave) and IL Route 60 (Townline Rd)

60 83 60 83

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

NOTES

Recommended Alternative

  • Roadway (Recommended)
  • Two 11’ Lanes in Each Direction with Curb and Gutter
  • 18’ Raised Curb Median from IL 176 to Circle Drive

and Maple Avenue to Diamond Lake Road

  • Two-Way Left Turn Lane from Circle Drive to Maple

Avenue

  • 6 Signalized Intersection Improvements
  • Railroad (Recommended)
  • Raise IL 60/83 over the RR (Roadway Overpass)
slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

NOTES

Typical Cross Section – Maple Avenue to Diamond Lake Rd IL Route 176 to Circle Drive

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

NOTES

Typical Cross Section – Circle Drive to Maple Avenue

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

NOTES

Railroad Grade Separation

  • IL Route 60/83 Grade Separation Would:
  • Reduce Excessive Traffic Delays and Queues
  • Significant Projected Increase in Train Traffic
  • Lengthy Freight Trains Block Crossing Repeatedly
  • Increase Safety for All Users
  • Conflicts between Trains and Roadway Users are Eliminated
  • Support Emergency Vehicle Response
  • Reduces Fire / Police / Ambulance

Response Times

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

NOTES

Railroad Grade Crossing Study

  • Summary of Alternates Previously Considered
  • RR to Pass Over IL 60/83
  • Lower RR to Pass Under IL 60/83
  • Partially Raise RR and Lower IL 60/83
  • Partially Lower RR and Raise IL 60/83
  • RR Grade Remains and Lower IL 60/83 (Underpass)
  • RR Grade Remains and Raise IL 60/83 (Overpass)
  • Maintain At-Grade RR Crossing
slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

NOTES

Recommended Railroad Crossing Alternate

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

NOTES

Recommended Railroad Crossing Alternate

IL 60/83 Over the Railroad (Overpass)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

NOTES

Property Displacements

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

NOTES

Land Acquisition Types

  • Fee Simple
  • Acquisition of all rights and interest
  • Permanent Easement
  • Ownership is retained by property owner
  • IDOT is allowed use of property to construct

and maintain facilities

  • Temporary Easement
  • Ownership is retained by property owner
  • IDOT is allowed to construct minor improvements
slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

NOTES

Land Acquisition Procedures

  • Determine Ownership
  • Prepare Property Description / Plat of Survey
  • Independent Appraisal
  • Negotiation
  • Condemnation
  • Relocation Assistance When Building Acquired
  • Advisory/Referral Services
  • Replacement Housing Payments
  • Reimburse Moving Expenses
slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

NOTES

Wetlands

  • 5 Wetlands / Waters of the US Impacted
  • Total Impacted Area - 0.2 acres
  • Wetland mitigation likely to occur at a 1.5:1 ratio
slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

NOTES

Public Lands – Section 4(f) Impacts

Public Land

Land Acquisition (acres) Temporary Easement (acres) Permanent Easement (acres)

MUNDELEIN PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT John Wiech Park 0.04 0.03 None Diamond Lake Sports Complex 0.32 0.01 None Orchard View Park 0.09 0.09 0.04 LAKE COUNTY FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT Country Side Golf Course 0.89 0.15 None

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

NOTES

Noise Analysis – Project Type

  • Type I Project – IL 60/83

– New Roadway Construction – New Travel Lanes – Substantial Roadway Alteration

  • Type II Project

– Applies to Existing Roadways – Retrofitting – IDOT Has No Type II Program

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

NOTES

Noise Analysis Process

  • 1) Identify Noise Receptor Locations
  • 2) Determine Traffic Noise Level

– Modeling – Validated by Field Monitoring

  • 3) Traffic Noise Impact Identification
  • 4) Traffic Noise Abatement Analysis
slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

NOTES

Noise Receptor Locations

A receptor is an outdoor area of frequent human use along the roadway.

Residential (CAT B) House of Worship (CAT C) Golf Course (CAT C)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

NOTES

FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria

Activity Category Noise dB(A)

Description of Activity Category

A

57 Serene Lands in which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance; rarely applies (Tomb of the Unknown Soldier)

B

67 Residential

C

67 Hospitals, Schools, Places of Worship, Parks, Forest Preserves

D

52

interior

Hospitals, Libraries, Places of Worship, Schools, Institutions

E

72 Hotels, Motels, Offices, Restaurants

F

None Agriculture, Airports, Industrial, Retail, Utilities

G

None Undeveloped Lands

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

NOTES

Common Noise Levels

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

NOTES

Interior vs. Exterior Noise

  • IDOT and FHWA stipulate that outdoor areas of

frequent human use be given primary consideration.

  • Interior noise for private residences not studied (Cat B).
  • Interior noise levels are evaluated only if no exterior use

areas are identified for those lands in Category D.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

NOTES

Traffic Noise Level Determination

  • Noise calculated at the Worst-Case receptor locations
  • Predicted Traffic Noise Levels are estimated by using

FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM)

  • Scenarios: Existing, Future-No Build, Future-Build
  • Existing noise levels validated with field monitoring
slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

NOTES Feasibility & Reasonableness Policy

  • Feasibility

– Abatement must achieve at least 5 dB(A) traffic noise reduction – Abatement must be feasible to construct

  • Reasonableness

– Generally, noise abatement cost must be < $24,000* per benefitted receptor – Must achieve at least an 8 dB(A) noise reduction at a benefited receptor

*Adjustment factors can increase the allowable cost per benefitted receptor

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

NOTES

IL 60/83 Potential Noise Walls

  • 239 Sensitive Receptors Identified and Studied
  • 17 Noise Abatement Walls Studied
  • 5 Noise Abatement Walls are Feasible & Reasonable
  • Wall Heights 10 – 12.5 Feet
  • 1 ¼ Miles of Potential New Noise Walls
  • 105 Benefitted Receptors
  • Recommended Walls AFTER the Viewpoint Solicitation
slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

NOTES

Viewpoints Solicitation

  • Benefited Receptors Rental Properties

– One Vote For Tenant – One Vote For Owner (per unit)

  • Receptors that share property line with IL 60/83

– Receive Two (2) Votes

  • Benefitted Receptors will be contacted up to 2 times to

maximize response rate

  • Response goal per barrier is 33%
  • Abatement wall is likely to be implemented if majority

vote is in favor

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

NOTES

Viewpoints Example Letter & Form

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

NOTES

IDOT Current Typical Example Walls

slide-30
SLIDE 30

30

NOTES

Advantages of BMPs

  • Improves Overall Water Quality
  • Minimizes Soil Erosion
  • Controls Stormwater Runoff – Captures

Soil Sediment and Roadway Pollutants

slide-31
SLIDE 31

31

NOTES

Locations of BMPs

slide-32
SLIDE 32

32

NOTES

Schedule / Funding

Schedule

  • Community Advisory Group Meeting No. 7 – 6/18/13
  • Public Meeting No. 2 – 10/22/13
  • Community Advisory Group Meeting No. 8 – 11/17/16
  • Public Hearing – Spring 2017 (Target)
  • Design Approval – June 2017 (Target)

Funding Status

  • Phase II and Phase III are not currently included in the Department’s

FY 2017-2022 Proposed Highway Improvement Program

– Phase II - Contract Plan Preparation & Land Acquisition – Phase III - Construction

slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

NOTES

Next Steps

  • Give Consideration to Feedback from this Meeting
  • Refine Design, as Applicable
  • Present Recommended Alternate to the Public

Spring 2017 (Target)

  • Project Website:: www.ilrte6083study.com
slide-34
SLIDE 34

34

NOTES

Project Workshop Working Session

Review Recommended Improvements with Meeting Participants

slide-35
SLIDE 35

35

NOTES

Questions

  • Questions and Comments
  • Group Discussion to Follow